User talk:Kaffeeringe.de

Philosophy of Composition

Keep up the great work on The Philosophy of Composition! I've done some substantial work on it already but I agree that there's plenty of room for growth. Let me know if I can help with whatever you're doing or if you need advice on what you've already done, etc. That article is on my watchlist so I'll keep an eye on it! --Midnightdreary 23:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PaulAusterCountryOfTheLastThings.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:PaulAusterCountryOfTheLastThings.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PaulAusterCountryOfTheLastThings.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PaulAusterCountryOfTheLastThings.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Names of companies

Hi, saw you're shuffling around M.M.Warburg & CO KGaA. You may want to read WP:NCCORP before you go any further. Also note that if you're moving things it's better to use the actual move function of the page, to preserve the history of the text. Happy New Year! --Noiratsi (talk) 15:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I only tried to help a friend, who works at that company and failed to get all the wrong name pages to the right one. I am not soo experienced with this kind of bigger changes. So: Yes, you are right, moving would have been the better option. I didn't know that a normal user can do that.

For now I have made the redirects point to M. M. Warburg & Co.. Anyone editing on behalf of a company or employee should disclose that fact—see WP:COI. WP:NCCORP is the main guideline on how to name articles, and as detailed there we usually prefer not to include the suffix (like "KGaA"). In some cases titles also drop the "& Co", but in this case I've left it for now. Thanks for your contributions, and I'm sorry if it seems like your efforts have just been undone! —Noiratsi (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I noticed there was also a discussion about this a while back, at Talk:M. M. Warburg & Co., and everyone agreed that the current title is best. --Noiratsi (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry, I didn't disclose it - I thought, it wasn't nescessary for only moving a page to the correct name. And "M. M. Warburg & Co." is the wrongest spelling. They don't use spaces, and the Co. in written CO: http://www.mmwarburg.com/de/bankhaus/ You can't just tell IBM to be written I. B. M. just because that's the normal way. ;-) Would you please be so kind and at least move the page to M.M.Warburg & CO? I do understand, that KGaA doesn't have to be part of the page title. But M.M.Warburg & CO seems to be the spelling they use as their company name. --Kaffeeringe.de (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Since the move has already been discussed and it was agreed to use the current title, you would probably need to follow the procedure at WP:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves to get people's opinions. It might also be good to notify the people who previously commented at Talk:M. M. Warburg & Co.. Based on what was said in the last discussion, I doubt that any new move proposal will be successful, but there's no harm in seeing what people think. Make sure you read the previous discussion first - it's at Talk:M. M. Warburg & Co.#Requested move, in a green box. --Noiratsi (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

To me it seems, that these two people in that discussion didn't really know the company. It's pretty old. And the way they write their name is oldfashioned. They have always written their name "M.M.Warburg & CO". And sadly I don't have the time to discuss… So it has to remain incorrect… --Kaffeeringe.de (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)